William de Wormegay

• Preferred Name: William de Wormegay^{[1] [2] [3]}
  
• Alternate Name: Hanelade de Bidun Knight
  
• Gender: M
  
• Birth: 1101 in Lavendon, Buckinghamshire, England at LATI: N2.1709 LONG: E0.6607 with note: reformatted
  
• Nat ID: with note: Description: 33880390 Nat
  
• Burial: ABT 1166 with note: Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, p.794
  
• Death: 1159 in Holkham, Norfolk, England at LATI: N2.9477 LONG: E0.8072 with note: reformatted
  
• FSID: LXSK-WFH
  
• NFS ID: with note: Description: LH77-768 NFS
  
• Notes:

  === Life Sketch ===
  IN LATIN:
  
  The spelling of his name is variously spelt ;
  Haveladi, Hanela' and Halnacus.
  
  As per “Rotuli de Dominabus et Pueris et Puellis de Donatione Regis in XII Comitatibus . . . . anno 31 Regis Henrici II. 1185.” by Stacey Grimaldi (1830) page 27 ;
  [In 1185] “Amicia de Limesia est in donatione Domini Regis, et est lx annorum, que fuit filia Haveladi de Bid[une habet] {Sic legere videtur necesse} ij filios, milites, quorum primogenitus vocatur Johannes de Limesia ; plures habet filias. Ipsa habet in . . . . xl solidatas terre de feodo Johannes de Limesia ; et de eo tenet.”
  
  The same entry appeara as per “The Publications of the Pipe Roll Society Volume XXXV.” being part II of Volume XXXIV which was “The Great Roll of the Pipe for the Thirty-First Year of the reign of King Henry the Second, A.D. 1184-1185” (1913) page 51 ;
  “Amicia de Limesia est in donatione Domini Regis, et est .lx. annorum, que fuit filia Hanela' de Bid[une habet] .ij. filios, milites, quorum primogenitus vocatur Johannes de Limesia ; plures habet filias. Ipsa habet in . . . . .xl. solidatas terre de feodo Johannis de Limesia ; et de eo tenet.”
  
  As per “Bracton’s Note Book” by F W Maitland (1887) pages 497 to 499 ;
  “Michaelmas, A.D. 1231, A.R. 15-16. 648 Norham. . . . . quod quidam Johannes de Bidun pater predicte Amicabilis et Sarre uxoris predicti Ricardi . . . . et reuera quidsam Halnacus pater ipsius Johannis . . . .”
  
  The following pedigree appears on page xliii of “The Publications of the Pipe Roll Society Volume XXXV.” being part II of Volume XXXIV which was “The Great Roll of the Pipe for the Thirty-First Year of the reign of King Henry the Second, A.D. 1184-1185” (1913) ;
  Hadenald de Bidun temp. Stephen and Hen. II, dead 1186 1[st]= Sara, 2[nd]= Agnes dau. and coh. of Payn Fitz John, widow of a Montchensey
  John de Bidun, Founder of Lavendon = Alice Mauduit . . . .
  Amicia de Bidun m. . . . de Limesi
  Sara de Bidun m. William Paynel (Vitell, E xv., fos. 22-23)
  
  As per “The Publications of the Pipe Roll Society Volume XXXV.” being part II of Volume XXXIV which was “The Great Roll of the Pipe for the Thirty-First Year of the reign of King Henry the Second, A.D. 1184-1185” (1913) pages xli to xliii ;
  “. . . . Now this " quidam Halnacus " is the " Haneladus de Bid[on] " of another of its entries, and about him there is something to be learnt. In 1166, he held of Roger Bigod seven knight's fees and of the Honour of Wallingford one. {Red Book, pp. 310, 395.} But he had clearly other holdings in Norfolk ; for the fragments of returns to the Inquest of Sheriffs (1170) show him as a tenant of the Earl of Arundel in that county, between 1166 and 1170, {Ibid., pp. cclxx, cclxxii. Cf. the Commune of London, pp. 125 et seq.} and he is, doubtless, the " Hadenaldus de Holcham " of one of them : our record, we shall see, shows his widow holding in " Holkham . . . de feodo Comitis Sussex."
  That he is not named among the tenants of the fief in 1166 is due to the imperfect record of the great composite " tenementum Willelmi de Albeneia Pincernse." {Red Book, pp. 397-399.} Of its sixty-six Norfolk fees only twenty-two have their tenants' names recorded. His own were probably among the ten which are entered twice over as granted ‘in maritagio’ to William by Roger Bigod with his daughter. {Ibid., pp. 395, 398. There is, however, reason to believe that he held others, for in later days the whole amount can be, I think, traced as eleven and half fees.}
  To account for his holding of Norfolk fees we must turn to Oseney Abbey (Oxon). Its cartulary (Cott. MS. Vitell. E xv) proves definitely (fo. 162) that he married Agnes, daughter of Payn Fitz John, who survived him, and that his gift to Oseney of " Hoccam " Church, Norfolk, was confirmed by her and by her eldest son, Ralf " de Muntchanesi," who appears as such in our record. It is also confirmed by Hugh Bigot, Earl of Norfolk. {Fo. 162 b. The text is damaged by the fire.} This most interesting discovery makes it clear that Hadenald was holding in Norfolk ‘jure uxoris’ those knight's fees which passed at her death to the Montchensys as the heirs of her previous marriage. They must, therefore, have come to her from her father, Payn Fitz John, to whom, indeed, Roger Bigod is known to have given lands. {Lansd. MS. 229, fo. 47 (ex inform. H. J. Ellis).} ' Halnad[us] ' also gave to Oseney the Church of Watlington, Oxon, after his marriage to Agnes and before 1162 (fo. 22). {The original grant is now Add. Ch. 20381 (ex inform. H. J. Ellis).} This was that " Walintone " which he held of the Honour of Wallingford. {Red Book, p. 310 (wrongly identified as Walington on p. 1341).}
  It was not Agnes, however, but a previous wife, Sara, who was the mother of his son and heir, the John de Bidun of our roll. This we learn from another suit, relating to the Church of Thompson, {Bracton's Notebook, Case 1072.} in which John's daughter-in-law, Maud " de Rochefordia," speaks of " Sarra " de Bidun as his mother. For John himself, his wife and his children, of whom the son was called John de Bidun ‘junior’, {See p. xxxvii for his marriage.} our record contains full evidence, though the christian names of his daughters have to be sought elsewhere. {Cal. of Inq., I, No. 323, combined with Bracton's Notebook, Case 648.} The Pipe Roll of the previous year {Pipe Roll, 30 Hen. II, p. 108.} enters a charge for their keep and clothing out of the issues of his land, although our record shows them all married but one . . . . The other difficulty arises from the fact that John de Bidun who made his return under Northants in 1166 {Red Book, p. 332.} cannot well be identical with the John who was Hadenald's son and successor, for Hadenald was himself living in 1166. There appears, however, to have been a John who was ‘brother’ of Hadenald {Add. MS. 28024, fo. 21 b. (ex inform. H. J. Ellis).} and this may have been the John of 1166, and the John who occurs on the Pipe Roll of 1156 (2 Hen. II).
  Hadenald may have owed his position in Norfolk to his wife, as daughter of Payn Fitz John, for his grant of Hockham Church to Oseney Priory was confirmed by his wife (as Agnes, daughter of Payn Fitz John) after his death, by her son and heir Ralf, and by Hugh Bigod, Earl of Norfolk. {Cott. MS., Vitell. E xv., fo. 162.} The importance of this is that Payn Fitz John had enumerated ' Hocham ' among the manors which Roger Bigod had given to his father John. {Lansd. MS. 229, fo. 147d.}”
  
  === SORLEY'S PEDIGREES (GS NUMBER Q929.242 S ===
  SORLEY'S PEDIGREES (GS NUMBER Q929.242 SO.68) P.22, 28;
  
  === Here is what we know about Haveladi in Latin... ===
  The spelling of his name is variously spelt ;
  Haveladi, Hanela' and Halnacus.
  
  As per “Rotuli de Dominabus et Pueris et Puellis de Donatione Regis in XII Comitatibus . . . . anno 31 Regis Henrici II. 1185.” by Stacey Grimaldi (1830) page 27 ;
  [In 1185] “Amicia de Limesia est in donatione Domini Regis, et est lx annorum, que fuit filia Haveladi de Bid[une habet] {Sic legere videtur necesse} ij filios, milites, quorum primogenitus vocatur Johannes de Limesia ; plures habet filias. Ipsa habet in . . . . xl solidatas terre de feodo Johannes de Limesia ; et de eo tenet.”
  
  The same entry appeara as per “The Publications of the Pipe Roll Society Volume XXXV.” being part II of Volume XXXIV which was “The Great Roll of the Pipe for the Thirty-First Year of the reign of King Henry the Second, A.D. 1184-1185” (1913) page 51 ;
  “Amicia de Limesia est in donatione Domini Regis, et est .lx. annorum, que fuit filia Hanela' de Bid[une habet] .ij. filios, milites, quorum primogenitus vocatur Johannes de Limesia ; plures habet filias. Ipsa habet in . . . . .xl. solidatas terre de feodo Johannis de Limesia ; et de eo tenet.”
  
  As per “Bracton’s Note Book” by F W Maitland (1887) pages 497 to 499 ;
  “Michaelmas, A.D. 1231, A.R. 15-16. 648 Norham. . . . . quod quidam Johannes de Bidun pater predicte Amicabilis et Sarre uxoris predicti Ricardi . . . . et reuera quidsam Halnacus pater ipsius Johannis . . . .”
  
  The following pedigree appears on page xliii of “The Publications of the Pipe Roll Society Volume XXXV.” being part II of Volume XXXIV which was “The Great Roll of the Pipe for the Thirty-First Year of the reign of King Henry the Second, A.D. 1184-1185” (1913) ;
  Hadenald de Bidun temp. Stephen and Hen. II, dead 1186 1[st]= Sara, 2[nd]= Agnes dau. and coh. of Payn Fitz John, widow of a Montchensey
  John de Bidun, Founder of Lavendon = Alice Mauduit . . . .
  Amicia de Bidun m. . . . de Limesi
  Sara de Bidun m. William Paynel (Vitell, E xv., fos. 22-23)
  
  As per “The Publications of the Pipe Roll Society Volume XXXV.” being part II of Volume XXXIV which was “The Great Roll of the Pipe for the Thirty-First Year of the reign of King Henry the Second, A.D. 1184-1185” (1913) pages xli to xliii ;
  “. . . . Now this " quidam Halnacus " is the " Haneladus de Bid[on] " of another of its entries, and about him there is something to be learnt. In 1166, he held of Roger Bigod seven knight's fees and of the Honour of Wallingford one. {Red Book, pp. 310, 395.} But he had clearly other holdings in Norfolk ; for the fragments of returns to the Inquest of Sheriffs (1170) show him as a tenant of the Earl of Arundel in that county, between 1166 and 1170, {Ibid., pp. cclxx, cclxxii. Cf. the Commune of London, pp. 125 et seq.} and he is, doubtless, the " Hadenaldus de Holcham " of one of them : our record, we shall see, shows his widow holding in " Holkham . . . de feodo Comitis Sussex."
  That he is not named among the tenants of the fief in 1166 is due to the imperfect record of the great composite " tenementum Willelmi de Albeneia Pincernse." {Red Book, pp. 397-399.} Of its sixty-six Norfolk fees only twenty-two have their tenants' names recorded. His own were probably among the ten which are entered twice over as granted ‘in maritagio’ to William by Roger Bigod with his daughter. {Ibid., pp. 395, 398. There is, however, reason to believe that he held others, for in later days the whole amount can be, I think, traced as eleven and half fees.}
  To account for his holding of Norfolk fees we must turn to Oseney Abbey (Oxon). Its cartulary (Cott. MS. Vitell. E xv) proves definitely (fo. 162) that he married Agnes, daughter of Payn Fitz John, who survived him, and that his gift to Oseney of " Hoccam " Church, Norfolk, was confirmed by her and by her eldest son, Ralf " de Muntchanesi," who appears as such in our record. It is also confirmed by Hugh Bigot, Earl of Norfolk. {Fo. 162 b. The text is damaged by the fire.} This most interesting discovery makes it clear that Hadenald was holding in Norfolk ‘jure uxoris’ those knight's fees which passed at her death to the Montchensys as the heirs of her previous marriage. They must, therefore, have come to her from her father, Payn Fitz John, to whom, indeed, Roger Bigod is known to have given lands. {Lansd. MS. 229, fo. 47 (ex inform. H. J. Ellis).} ' Halnad[us] ' also gave to Oseney the Church of Watlington, Oxon, after his marriage to Agnes and before 1162 (fo. 22). {The original grant is now Add. Ch. 20381 (ex inform. H. J. Ellis).} This was that " Walintone " which he held of the Honour of Wallingford. {Red Book, p. 310 (wrongly identified as Walington on p. 1341).}
  It was not Agnes, however, but a previous wife, Sara, who was the mother of his son and heir, the John de Bidun of our roll. This we learn from another suit, relating to the Church of Thompson, {Bracton's Notebook, Case 1072.} in which John's daughter-in-law, Maud " de Rochefordia," speaks of " Sarra " de Bidun as his mother. For John himself, his wife and his children, of whom the son was called John de Bidun ‘junior’, {See p. xxxvii for his marriage.} our record contains full evidence, though the christian names of his daughters have to be sought elsewhere. {Cal. of Inq., I, No. 323, combined with Bracton's Notebook, Case 648.} The Pipe Roll of the previous year {Pipe Roll, 30 Hen. II, p. 108.} enters a charge for their keep and clothing out of the issues of his land, although our record shows them all married but one . . . . The other difficulty arises from the fact that John de Bidun who made his return under Northants in 1166 {Red Book, p. 332.} cannot well be identical with the John who was Hadenald's son and successor, for Hadenald was himself living in 1166. There appears, however, to have been a John who was ‘brother’ of Hadenald {Add. MS. 28024, fo. 21 b. (ex inform. H. J. Ellis).} and this may have been the John of 1166, and the John who occurs on the Pipe Roll of 1156 (2 Hen. II).
  Hadenald may have owed his position in Norfolk to his wife, as daughter of Payn Fitz John, for his grant of Hockham Church to Oseney Priory was confirmed by his wife (as Agnes, daughter of Payn Fitz John) after his death, by her son and heir Ralf, and by Hugh Bigod, Earl of Norfolk. {Cott. MS., Vitell. E xv., fo. 162.} The importance of this is that Payn Fitz John had enumerated ' Hocham ' among the manors which Roger Bigod had given to his father John. {Lansd. MS. 229, fo. 147d.}”
  Change Date: 1 Sep 2014 at 18:52:51

• m. 1120 in Wormegay, Norfolk, England

1. Adeline de Wormegay, b. 1120 in Lavendon, Buckinghamshire, England     d. 1185 in Hereford, Herefordshire, England, United Kingdom

1. Title: BHO Online, history of Haveladi (Helenald de Bidun) and his children and grandchildren
   Publication: Name: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-hist-norfolk/vol5/pp474-483;
   Note: Theire can be convolution in these lines if not reading the source material correctly, as I found out. Haveladi had two wives, Sara and then Agnes. His three children came from Sara, they are: Amicia who married Gerard de Limesi, Sara who married William Paynel, and a John who had 5 girls and 1 boy named john, the later died without issue and so the estate went to his 5 sisters, one of which is also named Amice or Amy and she married a Clinton, there was also another Sarah who married a Beauchamp. Do NOT these sisters confused with the Aunts, I have put this with all of the children as to not get them confused. Here is another article that can explain it: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/bucks/vol4/pp379-387 http://www.british-history.ac.uk/inquis-post-mortem/vol1/pp80-86 (under Buckingham) and http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/rutland/vol2/pp207-211
   
2. Title: Continued History of The Limesi, Bidun and Ethelred 'The Unready' lines from BHO online
   Author: British History Online
   Note: LONG ITCHINGTON: Under section, Manors, discusses Ethelred and Limesi's Land... http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/warks/vol6/pp125-132 SHIPDEN AND CROMER: Discusses Limesi's Land continued... http://www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-hist-norfolk/vol8/pp102-107 Under section, William Turbus, discusses Bidun and his wife Agnes becoming canonized... http://www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-hist-norfolk/vol3/pp454-599 Under section, Cotes Bidun... http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/northants/vol4/pp29-39 MORCOTT: Under section Manors, discusses Bidun's land etc... http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/rutland/vol2/pp207-211 Watlington: Discusses Biduns history throughout... http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/oxon/vol8/pp210-252 Maxstoke: Under subsection Maxstoke, gives info on Amicia's father Halenath Bidun and husband Gerard de Limesi http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/warks/vol4/pp133-142 EPERSTON. EPRESTON: Gives pedigree and history of Limesi's Line from Radulphus, the son of that Ralph that came with William the Conquerer's Invasion force and was given title to lands in England... http://www.british-history.ac.uk/thoroton-notts/vol3/pp36-40 OXBURGH: Gerard de Limesi's daughter Alianore marries into the Lindsay line via William (note: the text is incorrect in regards to Alianore, they show David as being her Husband, when in fact she was his mother, check other source connected called, Alianora married William and not David her son...) http://www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-hist-norfolk/vol6/pp168-197
   
3. Title: Rotuli de dominabus et pueris et puellis de donatione regis in XII comitatibus: Lincolnscir ... by Stacey Grimaldi , Great Britain Public Record Office Published 1830
   Author: page 27 gives info on De Bidun etc...
   Publication: Name: https://archive.org/stream/rotulidedominab00offigoog#page/n44/mode/2up;